The American Quarterly Review, No. 18, June 1831 (Vol 9)

by Various

With regard to public examinations, we need not dwell on the question of their policy. All well-regulated universities in this country and Great Britain, at least, have a system of rewards, as well as of punishments; and this uniformity may be esteemed a fair criterion of the opinions of the wise and reflecting of those countries on this topic. However desirable it may be, that mankind should do their duty without fear or expectation, every day's experience testifies that the hope of reward, or the dread of punishment, powerfully influences their exertions, not only for temporal, but eternal purposes.

In the German universities, there are neither daily, nor semi-annual, nor annual examinations; and, accordingly, we are not much surprised to find them objected to by some who had received their education in that country. The difference, however, which prevails upon this point in the best colleges of different parts of the globe, ought to have suggested some slight qualification of the sweeping censures that were passed upon the system in the Convention. "The semi-annual examinations," says Dr. J. Leo Wolf, "as recommended by some of the gentlemen of the Convention, lower the student to the rank of a schoolboy, while, being a man, as he ought to be, they are useless, for he will know that it is for his own good, to be assiduous in his studies. Moreover, the result of his studies is proved at the time when he desires to graduate, and to be licensed for the practice of his profession. Then he must pass a strict rigid and public examination; and this I should warmly recommend. In Prussia, these examinations are particularly severe, but quite impartial and recorded." P. 251. So far as we can judge from the involved and almost unintelligible twaddle contained in the address of Mr. Woodbridge on the subject of discipline, we should conceive him opposed to these as well as to all other means, which would excite the emulation of the student; thus discarding, on faulty metaphysical speculation, one of the most powerful stimuli to all literary and honourable distinction; and which, if rightly directed, can never, in collegiate life, act otherwise than beneficially. Granting, then, that annual, or semi-annual public examinations are of excellent policy in all higher schools, it remains to inquire into the best mode of conducting them. The oral system is that received into most of our colleges. In it the students are necessarily interrogated on different subjects, so that it becomes a matter of difficulty, nay of impracticability, to determine, with any accuracy, their relative standing. Added to this, if the class be numerous, it is impossible to put a sufficient number of questions to each individual; and the bold and confident, will ever exhibit a manifest advantage over the timid and retiring. In every respect, the oral, seems to us to be inferior to the written examination, where either is practicable. In the departments of the languages—ancient and modern—an admixture of the two would always be requisite, for the purpose of determining the student's acquaintance with quantity or accent, etymology, syntax, &c.

The plan universally adopted into the higher schools of England, is that by written answers. The students of a class are all furnished with the same questions; and the answers to these are written in the examination room. All communication between the examinants is prevented; and no book allowed to be brought into the apartment. After the expiration of a certain time the answers are collected.

The English method has, so far as we know, been received into one of our universities only—the University of Virginia. It has now been practised there for five years; and, we have reason to believe, the results have been such, as to satisfy the faculty of its pre-eminence over the methods usually practised. The following is its arrangement as published in the Virginia Literary Museum.

"1. The chairman of the faculty shall appoint for the examination of each school, a committee consisting of the professor of that school, and of two other professors. 2. The professor shall prepare, in writing, a series of questions to be proposed to his class, at their examination, and to these questions he shall affix numerical values, according to the estimate he shall form of their relative difficulty, the highest number being 100. The list, thus prepared, shall be submitted to the committee for their approbation. In the schools of languages, subjects may also be selected for oral examination. 3. The times of examination for the several schools shall be appointed by the chairman. 4. At the hour appointed, the students of the class to be examined shall take their places in the lecture room, provided with pens, ink, and paper. The written questions shall then, for the first time, be presented to them, and they shall be required to give the answers in writing with their names subscribed. 5. A majority of the committee shall always be present during the examination; and they shall see that the students keep perfect silence, do not leave their seats, and have no communication with one another or with other persons. When, in the judgment of the committee, sufficient time has been allowed for preparing the answers, the examination shall be closed, and all the papers handed in. 6. The professor shall then carefully examine and compare all the answers, and shall prepare a report, in which he shall mark, numerically, the value which he attaches to each: the highest number for any answer being that which had been before fixed upon as the value of the corresponding question. For the oral examinations, the values shall be marked at the time by the professor, with the approbation of the committee, but the number attached to any exercise of this kind shall not exceed 20. 7. This report shall be submitted to the committee, and if approved by them, shall be laid before the faculty, together with all the papers connected with it, which are to be preserved in the archives of the university. 8. The students shall be arranged into three separate divisions, according to the merit of their examinations as determined by the following method. The numerical values attached to all the questions are to be added together, and also the values of all the answers given by each student. If this last number exceeds three-fourths of the first, the student shall be ranked in the first division; if it be less than three-fourths, and more than one-fourth, in the second; and if less than one-fourth, in the third."

This scheme combines the advantages of affording both the positive and relative standing of the pupil. And as those in the separate divisions are arranged alphabetically, it does not necessarily expose the lowest in the third division to the degradation and mortification, to which, however, they are often richly entitled.

The plan of examinations for honours and prizes, in the University of London, resembles the above essentially; differing from it, indeed, in few particulars. It comprises one regulation, however, which might be advantageously appended to the other. We copy it from the printed "Regulations"—Session, 1828-29.

"The paper containing the answers must not be signed with the student's own name, but with a mark or motto; and the name of the student using it, inclosed in a sealed envelope, inscribed with the mark or motto must be left with the professor, to be opened after the merit of the answers shall have been determined." This prevents the possibility of favouritism, in all classes, which are so large that the professor does not become acquainted with the autographs of his students. The examinants are there also placed, according to the merits of their answers, in classes, denominated the first, second, and third; provided the sum of their answers be equal to a certain amount; all below this point are not classed.

We have now touched upon the most important topics presented by the committee for the consideration of the Convention. Several others were propounded, but they seem to have fallen still-born from their authors. As regards the 11th, 12th, and 14th, "whether any religious service, and, if any, what may with propriety be connected with a university?"—"Whether any course of instruction on the evidences of Christianity will be admissible?"—And, "Is it proper to introduce the Bible as a classic in the institutions of a Christian country?" We shall gladly follow the example of prudence exhibited by the Convention, and pass them over. The affirmative view of the last topic, meets with an enthusiastic supporter in the author of one of the works, whose titles are placed at the head of this article.

One proposition only remains, on which, in conclusion, we may indulge a few remarks:—"The importance of adding a department of English language, in which the studies of rhetoric and English classics shall be minutely pursued." This subject, we regret to see, experienced the fate of others, more deserving of neglect, and was not discussed.